Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Olympus dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jul 12, 2007, 12:59 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
trooplewis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 578
Default

Had a few minutes today to visit the outlet center at Viejas Indian Reservation in San Diego. I took along both my new 510 and my old (and diminutive in comparison) FZ5. Here are a few comparison shots. I do have to say the the best 510 shots easily beat the best FZ5 shots...but there were a LOT of FZ5 shots that easily beat the Olympus; the FZ5 almost never missed focus,the OLY missed more often. Much of that is my own skill, I'm sure.

All the FZ shots were taken in "P" mode, or Telemacro mode, -1/3 EV, spot meter, natural mode

The 510 shots were all taken in "A" mode, spot metered, most at -.3 or -.7 EV, Natural mode (with Contrast at 0, Sharpness and Saturation at +1. Noise Filter on at Low setting.

None of these shots had ANY PP work done. All are straight out of the camera, cropped and resized only. I am on a 'sort of' campaign on the "other" forum about getting good images straight out of the camera with no PP work done.

After looking at the comparisons, in Spot-meter mode on the 510 I would NOT set the ev to -.3, as the pictures look underexposed, but could easily be lightened. On the other hand, I would set the EV down another 1/3 step to -2/3 in the FZ5, which had more overexposed areas in spot meter mode.


trooplewis is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jul 12, 2007, 1:02 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
trooplewis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 578
Default

The 510



The FZ5





The E-510



The FZ5



The E-510



The FZ5




trooplewis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 12, 2007, 1:05 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
trooplewis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 578
Default

The E-510



The FZ



The 510



The FZ



The 510



The FZ


trooplewis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 12, 2007, 1:16 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
trooplewis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 578
Default

The 510



The FZ5



The 510


The FZ



The 510


The FZ5





trooplewis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 12, 2007, 1:34 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
trooplewis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 578
Default

And this one was just for fun


trooplewis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 12, 2007, 8:26 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
HarjTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,534
Default

Hi troop

had look at the shots and from what i can tell, it may be worth while not underexposing the shots by -1/3 to -1/7 with the E510 but to basically leave it at 0 or +1/3EVF. For approximately the same aperture the 510 is doubling the shutter speed compared to the FZ5. I'm not sure what to do with the bear shot though - thats a real toughy :? :O. I'd like to see what you can get if you shot in manual mode ?

Here's a few of the shots PP in lightzone - just a quick zone adjustment/levels in Photoshop and thats it.











I'm at work but will give some more thought to this later.

Cheers

Harj


HarjTT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 12, 2007, 11:04 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
trooplewis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 578
Default



Thanks HarjTT;

After reviewing all my shots, I would not use any -EV compensation again when using spot-meter mode with the 510. I do know that using in bright daylight outdoors, if you aer in ESP mode or even center-weighted, you have to undercompensate or you will get too many blown highlights. I could have lightened the shots quickly in Irfanview, but I sort of have this almost religious thing about not doing any PP work to the photos.


I actually prefer the underexposed 510 shots I listed here to the brighter FZ shots. Pretty easy to lighten and get them where you want, but in the FZ ones you can't get the highlights back once the camera blows them.
trooplewis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 12, 2007, 2:06 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,066
Default

i dont have an FZ or a 510 but i have some observations
Panasonics LC-1 if it compares has deadly acurate metering, good DR and excellent colour rendition. It is entirely possible to take frames that are excellent without any PP at all. However at 5Mp the files are thin, and wont take much PP work before they fall appart.

With my E-300 its quite different, it has much more latitiude to recover from underexposure, and will take quite heavy PP and sharpening to good effect. The metering is characteristicly less than the LC-1, its harder work to use and almost always requires PP. ESP just doesnt work out for me especially in summer with strong light, so i use CW all the time. In this way it is reliable to shoot without issue. But in addition to being able to take more PP, the 300 virtually requires it, its not a great 'out of the box' jpeg producer. In short, I dont have much confidence in the 'no PP' strategy for a dSLR.

As to spot metering, to my mind proper use requires you to observe the stop range between high and low, or if the cameras propensity is to blow out, then just the high side. In my experience this will leave a lot of unexposed area, not that it is a bad thing. I dont think you can generalise settings for ESP (-1/3 ev) and be successful spot metered.

Where you find you are continually underexposing you need to act on it.

Riley
Rriley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 12, 2007, 5:19 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
HarjTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,534
Default

Regards the IQ I'm with you on the 510 theyre just that wee bit better but what I'd really like to see is some of the other 510/410 shooters post their shots in similar lighting and see if theyre cameras do the same thing as troops's 510.

Quote from Jeff's review over at Dresource regards the 410:

"The camera's weak spot is definitely exposure. The camera tends to underexpose by 1/3 - 2/3 EV, and sometimes more. My studio shots required a full stop of additional exposure compensation compared with other cameras I've tested. If you know to watch out for this, it's not a big deal -- try exposure bracketing, or just setting the exposure compensation at +1/3EV -- but you will certainly encounter underexposure with this camera."

http://dcresource.com/reviews/olympu...ew/index.shtml

Simon/Phil's review over at Dp doesn't mention any exposure issues with the 410 that they had been provided by Oly.

Spotted this tidbit over at megapixel's and wondered if the same applied to the 510:

"On the JPEG side, Olympus deserves a special mention. The E-410 offers a superb selection of image compression levels, including one of the lowest, 1/2.7, which has no artefacts and which retains an extensive range of colours."

http://www.megapixel.net/reviews/oly-e410/e410-gen3.php

Also check out the sample 510 gallery over at imaging-resource. Quiet extensive series of shots from the camera at near enough all ISO's.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E510/E510A7.HTM


Cheers

HarjTT

:O :?
HarjTT is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 4:45 PM.